Accuracy of resource selection functions across spatial scales
By C. B. Meyer, Wilfried Thuiller. 2006
186 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e39c72cb05fd4c29b91355c452a72ca4ade4d222
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecological Modeling
- Jorge M. Lobo
- A. Jiménez‐Valverde
- Raimundo Real
- P. Acevedo
- Alexandra D. Syphard
- Janet Franklin
- Joaquín Hortal
- Ross K. Meentemeyer
In Ecology
- Jorge M. Lobo
- A. Jiménez‐Valverde
- Raimundo Real
- P. Acevedo
- Alexandra D. Syphard
- Andrew M. Allen
- Janet Franklin
- Navinder J. Singh
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Jorge M. Lobo
- A. Jiménez‐Valverde
- Raimundo Real
- P. Acevedo
- Alexandra D. Syphard
- Andrew M. Allen
- Janet Franklin
- Navinder J. Singh
Citations in the corpus
- Linking Movement Ecology with Wildlife Management and Conservation (2016, background): “The second , third and fourth orders of selection concern the selection of the home range , habitat patches within the home range and microhabitats within used patches respectively ( Johnson , 1980 ; Meyer and Thuiller , 2006 ) .”
- Delimiting the geographical background in species distribution modelling (2012, background): “Unfortunately, the GB has usually been defined using geopolitical criteria with no real biological justification (Meyer & Thuiller, 2006).”
- Differences in spatial predictions among species distribution modeling methods vary with species traits and environmental predictors (2009, background): “One recent meta-analysis found that those models that included environmental predictors from multiple, hierarchical scales yielded the most accurate predictions (Meyer and Thuiller 2006).”